Is ISO 9001 Cresting? Is a rebellion in the works?

[Rob Nix]

Ralph, I honestly still cannot tell whether this is parody or not. "...being proactive and implementing QMS improvements" does not require a certificate. A clean slate at internal audit time (or improvement ideas only), low customer complaints / high satisfaction, higher profits, etc. are the motivators for keeping the QMS dynamic. Scotch tape is all that is needed to keep the cert on the wall.

 

[Wes Bucey]

I find it amusing that the practitioners of Quality would believe that ISO is dying, rather than promoting it. You guys complain that Management loses interest and makes this stuff become "the flavor of the day," when you are more guilty of it yourselves. For Shame. You should promote what is one of the most significant Quality movements we have seen to date (18 years and counting). If the system doesn't accomplish all it should at your company, well promote it. If you are the Quality Manager, then be the evangelist. If you don't, who will?

To comment on a few of the specific questions in this thread:

I read a few days ago that there was an estimated 30% increase in global ISO 9001 based certifications in the last year to 630,000+, and ISO 14001 was reaching well into 6 figures as well (if I recall the number correctly). This was based on a survey extrapolation, not the ISO organization database, which is why it is approximate.

As to combining Quality, Environmental and Safety, the first two are already combined at many certified companies, and many companies already include safety into their ISO 14001 systems. Fully integrated systems are not far off. They are the reality at many companies large and small.

Ok, friends...I'll wait for the darts of indignation to start flying...(LOL)

...I've got a light week on my schedule... (seems no one wants to get audited Thanskgiving week, imagine that!).

Have a nice Thanksgiving, all.

So, if my math is correct, using American definition of "billion" (1,000,000,000), there are 6-1/2 billion people on the planet and approximately one ISO-registered company for every 10,000 people. That seems like excellent market penetration. If all the ISO-registered companies were concentrated in the US, that would be one registered company for every 400 people.

So, if every registered company paid ONLY $1,000/year to a registrar to maintain registration, that would make the gross income of the registrar industry $630,000,000 - I imagine registrars collect more than $1,000/year (on average) from each of their registrants. How many registrars are there? What do they REALLY gross?

 

[Jen Kirley]

So, if every registered company paid ONLY $1,000/year to a registrar to maintain registration, that would make the gross income of the registrar industry $630,000,000 - I imagine registrars collect more than $1,000/year (on average) from each of their registrants. How many registrars are there? What do they REALLY gross?

I'm grossing so little now that I think I'm in the wrong line of work!

I can assure you that registration in Maine is not increasing much, if it in fact isn't shrinking. ISO is still a largely manufacturing standard and we have lost most of our manufacturing base. Other industries (like finance and medicine) with a clear need for systems and controls have their own regulatory standards--granted, those standards very often do little to address quality. I more often see them go for Baldrige than ISO.

My quarrel with ISO (no dart throwing intended here) is the pursuit of the certificate and not excellence. The certificate should be acknowledgement of hard work, not reward or a rite of passage. I often read questions asking what would satisfy auditors and not what is right for the organization (but auditors would also accept).

No doubt there are sincere people who pursue the certificate out of a desire for organizational excellence, but an organization can do that wonderfully without ISO, or by conforming to ISO but not registering to it. ISO is good for making people feel comfortable about their suppliers. There's a significant lure in that.

I expect there are many global companies registering to the standard with the intent on making themselves remarkable in the global economy. For example, I am seeing call centers from India and manufacturers from Asian countries posting their questions here. So long as the integrity of registration remains strong, it really is a good thing. But proactive? Not by itself, in my humble view.

 

[Helmut Jilling]

Yes, exactly - I am currently going thru my 5th implementation - fortunately I am not the QA manager this time - and we're making the same old mistakes that undermine the effectiveness of a good QMS. We are putting processes in place that make it wasier for auditors but heck on the organization. Unfortunately those in QA are not well versed in ISO and so they must listen to the consultant (whose goal is to get us registered and so he wants to make things easy for the auditor argh!).

On top of the registration & audit game - we have not gotten away from customized customer audits and requirements, in fact it gets worse every year as ISO regististration has sub optimized quality management systems.

I am NOT against a strong and effective QMS - and the standard does describe ONE version of a good QMS. But I am very opposed to how organizations turn managing their QMS into maintaining registration. It's one thing to be an auditor, quite another to live with the consequences of the decisions made to appease the auditor. And with our current 'lean and mean' organizations - we'll never get away from that. (This includes the decison to hire a consultant rather than hire the necessarry expertise full time)

I sympathize, but not every ISO certified company has implemented a poor system, just to get a cert. Admittedly, I am somewhat selective about which clients I select, but most of the companies I have audited have sincerely attempted to put in good systems, and I have supported their efforts by sincerely trying to audit in an approrpaite and value added manner.

But, if managment does not have their heart (or head) in the right place, and still doesn't seek quality and good performance, then geez...they're 20 years behind the curve. They only have to look at our beloved GM and Ford to see where that road leads.

I still say there are three kinds of managers: those who MAKE things happen, those who WATCH things happen, and those who ask, "WHAT happened."

 

[Bev D]

I sympathize, but not every ISO certified company has implemented a poor system, just to get a cert.

I'm not sayign that ALL registrations are badly executed, but a great number are - just read some of the posts on this site...Companies ARE getting frustrated with the registration process AND the fact that registration no longer protects you from the multiple and varied Customer specific audits and requriements.

Please note that a good QMS is a good thing in my mind - but you don't need ISO to get there and too aften companies that get registered to ISO find that all they've done is added a massive bureaucracy on top of their old problems...

Denial is one of the first signs of death

 

[bazzle - 2012]

Maybe forced away by linked business processes?

How about this scenario:

Hmm,,, ISO been done to death. Need a NEW impetus/system to keep us employed, make our money.....

(Consultants, Auditing bodies, Registrars etc)

Bazzle

 

[Helmut Jilling]

I'm not sayign that ALL registrations are badly executed, but a great number are - just read some of the posts on this site...Companies ARE getting frustrated with the registration process AND the fact that registration no longer protects you from the multiple and varied Customer specific audits and requriements.

Please note that a good QMS is a good thing in my mind - but you don't need ISO to get there and too aften companies that get registered to ISO find that all they've done is added a massive bureaucracy on top of their old problems...

Denial is one of the first signs of death

I agree with your comments. However, most of the frustration I read on these posts are from quality professionals who are frustrated that their management are supportive of their true efforts. That is not the fault of ISO or any other system or certification. That is the fault of managment who are trying to take a shortcut.

The history of business literature over the last 30 years is littered with the memories of formerly great companies who give lip service to the principles but won't follow them themselves. And the mighty Ford and GM may find their sins catching up to them as well. It is not their suppliers who are causing their problems. They are causing their problems themselves.

Deming told them where their problems were and they fired him. He went to Japan because he needed work. The Japanese quality revolution could have and should have happened in the USA.

PS: I think we I think quality professionals have to do a better job of preaching the gospel, and quit blaming the unbelievers.

 

[Bev D]

I agree with your comments. However, most of the frustration I read on these posts are from quality professionals who are frustrated that their management are supportive of their true efforts. That is not the fault of ISO or any other system or certification. That is the fault of managment who are trying to take a shortcut.

Both ends of the spectrum (lack of true management support and too rigid or too loose registrars) are causal factors to ISO's current Problem. In fact the two factors can and do compound each other. Both are wrong.
The trend toward increasing cutomer audits and unique QMS requirements is a result of the failure of ISO registration to be predictive of good quality - which is what the Customer wants from a QMS.

No ISO implementation can overcome poor management.
Poor registrars cannot create a good QMS.

As for your last comment, I might amend it from preaching the gospel to DOING the gospel. And when I find myself in a company that doesn't care and I cannot get them to see the light (and you can't truly describe the light, you must ignite it and display it for managment to see it and get it) then I move on.

 

[Helmut Jilling]

...And when I find myself in a company that doesn't care and I cannot get them to see the light (and you can't truly describe the light, you must ignite it and display it for managment to see it and get it) then I move on.

Me too. There are plenty of companies who want to use these tools to get better. I won't waste much time working with a company who's management doesn't want to work. If they don't want to do it right, they certainly don't want me around.

They will ultimately fail, and I don't want to be on that ship if it does.

 

[Paul Simpson]

Interesting idea - choose your customers!

Me too. There are plenty of companies who want to use these tools to get better. I won't waste much time working with a company who's management doesn't want to work. If they don't want to do it right, they certainly don't want me around.

They will ultimately fail, and I don't want to be on that ship if it does.

Seems like your registrar is one of the very few who is taking away certificates of registration ... most are fighting for market share and trying to get more customers through the door.

Unless the data doesn't support your case?